To all the people complaining that this feels like a Division game... | Forums

[pini0n]

Ah yes, I distinctly remember the hub in Wildlands,, Elder Scroll Games, Witcher 3, Assassin's Creed games, Far Cry games etc.


There are gloves in the game that give you +20% throw range.


They can be a bit spongy if they outlevel you and you don't go for headshos. but I agree, I never felt like they were spongy to be honest precisely because most of my kills are headshots. I like that the game can throw tough enemies at you without it feeling unfair or just grindy to kill them.
In 50h of playtime in this beta I cleared pretty much everything, from normal enemies to areas requiring gear scores of 150. Yes, drones are spongy but you have other tools to deal with those (rocket/nade launchers, snipers for precise shots on their weakpoints, defensive cloak spray etc.) and in the beta in a lot of the tough drone fights you were outleveled.

I do think it's a valid complaint when people mention unarmored targets being a bit spongy though.

Yeah, by these games I was talking about open world with co-op. The games you mention have little to none co-op elements, this one feels like it needs to be played in coop.

Didn't know about the gloves, it can be a tactical spring on the gloves. I just hope it stops there.

[TreFacTor]

Everything from the character creator, social hub, always online, to the clunky interface and terrible animations is from the Division.

-_-
That's why it feels and looks so bad. It doesn't do even the simplest thing well like Wildlands.

[pini0n]

Why do I need to show off in a survival/tactical single player game? The hub also breaks story immersion... It is dumb af that you see other ghosts walking around when atm you should ONLY see Hill and the other two troopers that survived the crash. Wildlands did not have it, this game should not have it.

This is not a single player game anymore. They changed it so you need to have people playing with you. But I agree that story wise, the hub with other players is dumb.

[pini0n]

Everything from the character creator, social hub, always online, to the clunky interface and terrible animations is from the Division.

-_-
That's why it feels and looks so bad. It doesn't do even the simplest thing well like Wildlands.

Except the animations in The Division are much better. Not even talking about cover mechanics that are awful in Breakpoint.

[vahndaar]

Humans didn't feel too spongey. What did annoy me was their buffed damage. Getting 1 shotted by level 150 wolves felt like a bit of a hack. I'm fine with them being generally tougher but enemy damage should be dictated exclusively by their weapon, not what gear level they are.

The loot system is clearly ripped straight from AC Odyssey. Gear score is pulled from Division. The way the weapon loot works is very Division. The similarities end here, it's just the loot systems that feel familiar.

[pini0n]

Have you ever played a GHOST RECON game before (except wildlands)?

Ghost recon has allways been a military tactical shooter with coop functionality (gameplay was based on Rainbow Six, just outdoors in open terrain).
This franchise was never a real multiplayer game, like you call it, it was a singleplayer game with coop mode..... and therefor not only the hub is out of place (especially because it brakes immersion and the entire story/lore... you are a survivor from 32 ghosts, nomad even says more than half his man died, so why do i see hundred different nomads at the hub?).
Same for the gearscore.... it brakes not only immersion by locking areas, it even brakes with all "core-elements" from the ghost recon franchise.

These are the real reasons why we are angry.
It has nothing to do with a dislike of lootershooter (a lot of us even love them), it just doesn't fit to ghost recon!!!!

If they created a new IP with all these mechanics none of us would be angry nor disappointed.

I understand your frustration. They changed your game to a co-op looter shooter.

But this is no Division. It's still a SHOOTER and not a RPG where you need to min-max your gear to kill faster.

[quinch1199]

400+hrs in Division 1, 300+hrs in Division 2 and I can say…

…Breakpoint has FAR TOO MANY ELEMENTS FROM THE DIVISION IN IT.

Is it “Division 2.5” of course not BUT when trying to relate in the written word how affronted by these heavy RPG elements such as loot progression, gear scoring, levelling etc is we can only best describe it by pointing to where its clear influence has come from..

The Division, and also the newer Assassins Creed games!

Ghost Recon was its own genre. Now Ubisoft have taken the misguided route to try to merge all their main franchises into one huge monster of vague similarity.
Clearly in a vain attempt to hard wire longevity into the game they’ve introduced random Loot-drops with better “stats” and better “levels” so that those players with that style of “more is better” addiction feel compelled to keep playing well beyond the scope of the story or how the environment plays out.

Instead of investing in better Ai or creating a deep story with 100hrs of gameplay we get a 10hr story and Ai as dumb as a brick who takes huge doses of Valium!!

Why? So Ubisoft can sell the economy of random loot, of buying premium credits to ensure “higher level” gear.

It should be resisted.

[TreFacTor]

All I was expecting was an improved Wildlands but what they delivered is way worse. I forced myself to play and other than getting higher gear I didn't need to use any of the other additions to the game (just like the division). I used everything in wildlands and enjoyed it.

[Agent...Tex]

400+hrs in Division 1, 300+hrs in Division 2 and I can say…

…Breakpoint has FAR TOO MANY ELEMENTS FROM THE DIVISION IN IT.

Is it “Division 2.5” of course not BUT when trying to relate in the written word how affronted by these heavy RPG elements such as loot progression, gear scoring, levelling etc is we can only best describe it by pointing to where its clear influence has come from..

The Division, and also the newer Assassins Creed games!

Ghost Recon was its own genre. Now Ubisoft have taken the misguided route to try to merge all their main franchises into one huge monster of vague similarity.
Clearly in a vain attempt to hard wire longevity into the game they’ve introduced random Loot-drops with better “stats” and better “levels” so that those players with that style of “more is better” addiction feel compelled to keep playing well beyond the scope of the story or how the environment plays out.

Instead of investing in better Ai or creating a deep story with 100hrs of gameplay we get a 10hr story and Ai as dumb as a brick who takes huge doses of Valium!!

Why? So Ubisoft can sell the economy of random loot, of buying premium credits to ensure “higher level” gear.

It should be resisted.

You Brits sure have a say with words. I agree with your general sentiments. The only part that bothers me is that you are so danged polite about it. If you are hurt about it then Hurt Them Back. Words do hurt. You just have to become skilled at it. Thanks for your post.

[DarkFire1978]

I understand your frustration. They changed your game to a co-op looter shooter.

But this is no Division. It's still a SHOOTER and not a RPG where you need to min-max your gear to kill faster.

GRB is a game in which a 7.62mm projectile magically does more damage if it comes from an identical weapon that has a magically higher "gear score". Min maxing gear score is absolutely necessary for maximum efficiency. This is a mechanic that has a place and a reason to exist in games such as the Division. It is not a mechanic that has any place in a game that purports to be a tactical shooter. It breaks the 4th wall and reduces immersion.